Comment

Comment on MPs vote in favour of historic bill to allow assisted dying after emotional debate

TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

It literally is a fallacy.

And again, this is nothing like the protocols Canada has.

You need to be terminally ill with less than 6 months to live, of sound mind, have the go-ahead from two unaffiliated doctors, and it needs to be reviewed and signed off by a judge.

You’re advocating for real, horrific, suffering to continue because hypothetically the law could be changed in future in a way that could be bad.

I’ve worked in care homes full of people who barely sleep, and spend their entire days in agony that you and I cannot even conceive of. They begged to die. They begged us to covertly kill them. But our job was to forcefully keep them alive against their will, prolonging their suffering for as long as possible. Seriously harrowing stuff.

If you had seen that, day in day out, I doubt you’d have this “we need to make them suffer, because hypothetically in X years we could be like Canada, where some doctors made a recommendation they really shouldn’t have.”

source

Sort:hotnew top

Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

It literally is a fallacy. This is not up for debate. The slippery slope fallacy is a real fallacy, and this is an example of that fallacy.

Circular reasoning fallacy

source
- TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  Lol you’re just trolling now. You don’t even know how half of those work.
  
  Calling out the slippery slope argument for being the no sense that it is is not an example of circular reasoning.
  
  Me sharing my experience and saying that I think you’d have a different view if you had seen what I’ve seen is not an anecdotal fallacy - that is where you use anecdotes and try to represent them as objective facts.
  
  I didn’t dismiss your view via ad populum fallacy, I just said it’s pointless moaning about the idea of people dying painlessly if they choose because the debate has already been settled by MPs and the public don’t have the appetite to have them backtrack on it.
  
  The appeal to authority fallacy is about dismissing an opinion as being invalid because an authorative figure days otherwise. That’s not what I said. I said the debate has been settled, so it’s pointless campaigning against right now.
  
  source
  - Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    What evidence do you have that the law will become so lax that doctors will aggressively push people to being euthanised?
    
    Canada
    
    source
    TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    Because “they just will mate. Slippery slope innit.” isn’t one IMO.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments